AT&T to Raise Early Termination Fee for iPhone and Other Smartphones to $325

[jlc1978]

AT&T got the exclusive because, frankly, they were the only carrier who could handle it. It had to be GSM -- iPhone users are world travelers and CDMA is worthless.

Not really - I'd bet the percentage of US iPhone users who are world travelers is no different than that for any other smartphone used for business. Even for those do, I would not be surprised if they had a second unlocked phone that they can just drop a SIM in overseas. For the US market, compatibility world wide is not a big deal for most users, so CDMA vs GSM is basically a non issue.

 

[Matt-M]

Can someone tell me WHY AT&T would start doing this just before the new iPhone launch rather than doing it right now?

The calm, reasoned, "not raging at AT&T", answer is that the new iPhones are expensive and AT&T stands to loose a lot of money to people who will sign up, cancel, pay the $175 ETF, then sell the new phone on eBay for a profit.

Raise the ETF to $325, and they just about break even after activation fee, one month's service, etc.

 

[goobot]

your all idiots

first off the fact you would cancel the contract is your fault and you cant expect att to pay for your phone

your little Verizon coast 350 so get over it

i guess you wana buy a 600 dollar phone instead?

your all babies get over it really. i really hate all these new apple people that dont know math or cant see that this is better than every other carrier. i mean really you people complain about everything.

 

[Matt-M]

I THINK ERMINATION FEES SHOULD BE ILLEGAL!

Since when did we have contracts on our home phones?
Cell phone service is much cheaper to manage and more profitable.

It has little to do with the cost of service or management - it is all about the cost of the phone. In fact, the profitability of the service is what makes subsidized phones possible.

It's not rocket science how this works:

1) Carrier pays manufacturer $699 for the phone.
2) Carrier sells it you for $299.
3) Carrier makes a profit only after you use the phone for 18 months or so.
4) If you cancel the contract, they need to recoup some of the $400 discount they gave you.

If the carriers are not allowed to charge ETF's, then you will be paying full price for every phone.

 

[Xtgirl]

This thread is really amazing...the replies are filled with comments that clearly show that not only did a good majority of the people not read any of the replies but they didn't actually read the initial article.

I certainly don't understand how people can be so pissed off that they want to cancel AT+T to jump to Verizon...a company that already has an ETF of 350 dollars on their smartphones.

Personally, I am waiting for news on June 7th of a Verizon iPhone and if I don't hear anything, I'm going to have to switch to the Incredible on VZW. My cell reception has been poor and getting worse...that does not mean that I think that my crappy reception problems dictates that AT+T sucks for everyone.

I'm actually kind of irritated by VZW...they implemented a new policy that most of their non-smartphones must still carry a 10 dollar data plan...I think that is really sucky especially for parents with teens who want a texting phone...what a waste of money for a phone with an awful browser...

This is by far a worse policy than these new high ETF's


I also don't get very upset by the ETF's because I figure if I want to get out of my contract that badly...I'll sell my phone and recoup a great deal of the cost if not all of the cost....especially with an iPhone that is capable of being unlocked/jailbroken

 

[Xtremehkr]

It's not really a contract when one side can completely change the terms and the other side is still legally obligated to meet those terms.

I signed a contract that agreed to a $175 termination fee, not a $325 one.

I'm tired of cell phone companies and credit cards being able to do this. Contracts used to mean that all terms were settled and agreed to unless otherwise changed.

Not, you owe us whatever we demand now that you're onboard and somehow obligated to live up to the contract you signed no matter how much it changes.

 

[kiljoy616]

It has little to do with the cost of service or management - it is all about the cost of the phone. In fact, the profitability of the service is what makes subsidized phones possible.

It's not rocket science how this works:

1) Carrier pays manufacturer $699 for the phone.
2) Carrier sells it you for $299.
3) Carrier makes a profit only after you use the phone for 18 months or so.
4) If you cancel the contract, they need to recoup some of the $400 discount they gave you.

If the carriers are not allowed to charge ETF's, then you will be paying full price for every phone.

Well said, in the end Apple devices are more expensive and you will pay for it one way or another, now how many people would actually pay 700 for an apple phone, haha. Apple also knows this, so this is why they will continue to use only ATT and no other carrier will get it. but please people keep dreaming, of a better world of tomorrow.

 

[lPHONE]

Steve simply picked AT&T to host his tea party.

Let me break it down...


Contracts and termination fees that attack your credit is mafia-style extortion. Now don't give me any b.s. about "your all idiots, it's your fault" because I'm tired of everything being my fault. **** your 35 page contracts and your termination fees they're 100% completely unnecessary.

The device is a ****ing iPod and a Phone- it's not phenomenal, if fact, it's kind of slow. I would say it's a $150 device, BUT where it shines is in it's access to iTunes and the App store (which is an exclusive tea party with Steve) and if you want access, you have to play. As bad as they suck, this time it's not AT&T's fault. Apple is the one who says who get's an iPhone and who doesn't, Steve simply picked AT&T to host his tea party. Once you understand that, you're one step closer to the truth, which is that Apple doesn't give a **** about you and you love them for it.

 

[feszty]

Totally unfair

It would only be fair, if AT&T would unlock the phone after the contract termination, or after the two years are up. But since the iPhone is locked and
only supposed to work with AT&T, this fee is total crap.

Thanks to the talented guys who make the unlock for the iPhone and liberate us from this tyrant. I was going to get the new iPhone, but this really makes me want to just keep my 3G and move to another carrier. AT&T's voice quality is just getting worse and the drop rate is going up. I can't believe there isn't anything better out there.

 

[ashVID]

I don't blame AT&T for this one bit. I blame those who have exploited the termination fee for their own profit. At $325 AT&T probably breaks even, nothing more. They are merely saying, "we are subsidizing your phone by $325 in exchange for you staying with us XXX months, if you leave early, we want our money back."

That's good business. Sweet irony that those whining and threatening to go Verizon are in for a shock, they run a business as well and you can expect the same charges and, at best, the same monthly cost.




ash =o)

 

[kdarling]

If I recall correctly, Verizon passed on the original iPhone, AT&T was the only major U.S. carrier to say yes.

Verizon never saw the iPhone. The idea of an Apple phone was presented to them back in 2005, months before serious design and OS porting work started. ATT didn't even sign up with Apple until mid 2006, although they had known about the idea long before Verizon did.

Remember, this was in the days when the carrier had more or less absolute control of what was on your phone. Verizon was perhaps a little short-sighted and did not want to give that up. It's completely different world today, largely because the iPhone's success changed the model.

The iPhone didn't really change the vendor UI smartphone model. Even back then, no carrier messed with smartphone UIs beyond adding an optional theme or nav app.

To me, the iPhone's (and other phones) far greater influence was in convincing Verizon to finally allow smartphones using non-Verizon A-GPS systems.

AT&T got the exclusive because, frankly, they were the only carrier who could handle it.

ATT got the exclusive partly because, unlike Verizon, they were willing to let Apple bypass their sales partners, and to initially avoid giving customers a subsidy. They didn't think they had anything to lose.

It had to be GSM -- iPhone users are world travelers and CDMA is worthless.

Since Apple went to Verizon, they clearly did not target GSM alone at first.

Smart world travelers would not pick the ATT iPhone. They'd get a phone which could use local SIMs.

 

[lPHONE]

It would only be fair, if AT&T would unlock the phone after the contract termination, or after the two years are up. But since the iPhone is locked and
only supposed to work with AT&T, this fee is total crap.

I forgot to add this point to my rant above, but I totally agree.

 

[2strokedude]

pot kettle black.... Big red has been doing things like this to customers since the beginning of time. Talk about coverage, talk about service quality but when it comes nickel and diming Verizon takes the cake.

+1

 

[Compile 'em all]

This is the biggest pile of crap that I have ever heard! Of course you won't be losing customers...you have us by the balls!

Verizin iphone is coming. Thats why.

 

[kdarling]

Not only should they unlock the phone after it's paid for, but my big beef is:

If I pay full price for a phone and/or get it from somewhere else... which means no subsidy was loaned to me... then why isn't my monthly fee lower than people who got a $400 subsidy ?

 

[Will do good]

I guess I won't get the new iPhone. Time to stop buying iPhone to support ATT...

 

[Matt-M]

It's not really a contract when one side can completely change the terms and the other side is still legally obligated to meet those terms.

I signed a contract that agreed to a $175 termination fee, not a $325 one.

I'm tired of cell phone companies and credit cards being able to do this. Contracts used to mean that all terms were settled and agreed to unless otherwise changed.

Not, you owe us whatever we demand now that you're onboard and somehow obligated to live up to the contract you signed no matter how much it changes.

Getting really tired of saying this...

READ THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE!

"The change, which would apply only to new contracts, appears set to come just prior to the launch of a new iPhone."

NEW contracts. NOT the one you already signed.

 

[andiwm2003]

This is a good move by ATT.

There are a number of people who are so needy to have the latest version of a phone that they are willing to pay. AT&T makes a good profit from that.

Airlines charge booking fees if you change a flight. Hotels charge cancellation fees. Retailers charge restocking fees. Lots of people want to pay these fees. That's why it's good profitable business.

This does not affect the vast majority of people who know what they want and stick to their contracts. That's why AT&T is not going to lose many customers over this.

 

[Matt-M]

The device is a ****ing iPod and a Phone- it's not phenomenal, if fact, it's kind of slow. I would say it's a $150 device...

A 32GB iPod Touch is $299. Your argument is that the adding a Cell Phone, GPS, Compass, Camera, etc. makes it $149 cheaper?

Interesting math.

 

[splashnader]

This thread is really amazing...the replies are filled with comments that clearly show that not only did a good majority of the people not read any of the replies but they didn't actually read the initial article.

I certainly don't understand how people can be so pissed off that they want to cancel AT+T to jump to Verizon...a company that already has an ETF of 350 dollars on their smartphones.

Personally, I am waiting for news on June 7th of a Verizon iPhone and if I don't hear anything, I'm going to have to switch to the Incredible on VZW. My cell reception has been poor and getting worse...that does not mean that I think that my crappy reception problems dictates that AT+T sucks for everyone.

I'm actually kind of irritated by VZW...they implemented a new policy that most of their non-smartphones must still carry a 10 dollar data plan...I think that is really sucky especially for parents with teens who want a texting phone...what a waste of money for a phone with an awful browser...

This is by far a worse policy than these new high ETF's


I also don't get very upset by the ETF's because I figure if I want to get out of my contract that badly...I'll sell my phone and recoup a great deal of the cost if not all of the cost....especially with an iPhone that is capable of being unlocked/jailbroken

Yep it is amazing how people just jump right in with their pre-existing dislike for a company and then pretend this is the last straw. I am sorry but I see nothing wrong with ATT raising the price of the ETF, to put it more in line with the cost of the phone. ATT has wised up to the fact that so many people, have in the past, purchased new iphones to play around with them for a while, and then use the cheap ETF to sell the iphone on ebay and make a profit at ATT expense. Sorry, but ATT is not in business to sustain your business of selling un-locked iphones on ebay, so that you can screw over the provider that sold you a subsidized product that you singed an agreement and contract stating that you would honor it.

Some of the people on this forum that are complaining, are part of the reason why ATT raised the ETF in the first place.

 

[boshii]

I don't really see the problem here.

When you buy the phone, you sign a contract. Follow through on the contract and you'll be ok.

AT&T can charge $1000 ETF and i wouldn't care because I know i'll follow through on the contract.

 

[JediZenMaster]

Yep it is amazing how people just jump right in with their pre-existing dislike for a company and then pretend this is the last straw. I am sorry but I see nothing wrong with ATT raising the price of the ETF, to put it more in line with the cost of the phone. ATT has wised up to the fact that so many people, have in the past, purchased new iphones to play around with them for a while, and then use the cheap ETF to sell the iphone on ebay and make a profit at ATT expense. Sorry, but ATT is not in business to sustain your business of selling un-locked iphones on ebay, so that you can screw over the provider that sold you a subsidized product that you singed an agreement and contract stating that you would honor it.

Some of the people on this forum that are complaining, are part of the reason why ATT raised the ETF in the first place.

+1 I'm going to buy you a drink Bro! Finally someone with sense on this issue.

 

[corriewf]

Wouldn' this push more people to switch to Sprint for the EVO?

 

[gkarris]

Ha, ha... there...

(starts fencing with an "air sword"... )

 

[JediZenMaster]

Let me break it down...


Contracts and termination fees that attack your credit is mafia-style extortion. Now don't give me any b.s. about "your all idiots, it's your fault" because I'm tired of everything being my fault. **** your 35 page contracts and your termination fees they're 100% completely unnecessary.

The device is a ****ing iPod and a Phone- it's not phenomenal, if fact, it's kind of slow. I would say it's a $150 device, BUT where it shines is in it's access to iTunes and the App store (which is an exclusive tea party with Steve) and if you want access, you have to play. As bad as they suck, this time it's not AT&T's fault. Apple is the one who says who get's an iPhone and who doesn't, Steve simply picked AT&T to host his tea party. Once you understand that, you're one step closer to the truth, which is that Apple doesn't give a **** about you and you love them for it.

Actually you should always read a contract before you sign it. And yes it is your fault if you want to break a contract for free before its duration is over.

Do you honestly think you should be able to get a discounted phone and not have any penalty if you just decide to cancel?

Wireless Companies are for Profit which means they are out to make money. You should always read your contract and that's whats wrong with america. People want to Sue or play victim because they didn't read something.

If you don't want a contract to effect your credit then get a Pay as you go or Cricket,Metro PCS or Virgin mobile. But don't expect for cell phone companies to just drop all fees because you dont want them.

Anyway the ETF doesn't even effect you because your a current customer. But i don't think thats really your issue. You seem to be on the bandwagon with the other AT&T haters. Well good luck with that because Verizon's ETF is 25 dollars higher and soon all of the ETFs in the industry will be this fee. So What will you do then?